Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860

Section: 337-F(vi), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 34

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Section: 154, 497(2)

Law: Police Rules, 1934

Section:

Summary of Judgment

The applicants challenged the conviction and sentence awarded by the Consumer Protection Court/Judicial Magistrate and upheld by the Sessions Judge in a case involving offences under Sections 337-F(vi), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), and 34 PPC.The incident involved a violent attack with hatchets, lathis, and pistols causing injuries and death.The prosecution’s case was supported by injured witnesses, medical evidence, and recovery of a hatchet.However, the Court found serious contradictions and inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence:Unexplained delay of 23 days in lodging the FIR despite injured being conscious and capable.Discrepancies between ocular and medical evidence regarding injuries.Failure to examine key witnesses (e.g., Mst. Hawa, Mashooq Solangi, and Head Constable).Contradictory versions of events and internal inconsistencies in witness testimonies.Recovery of weapon not properly sealed or blood-stained, and mashir denied recovery from accused.Medical officer was a dermatologist and did not provide detailed medical opinion.Injured witnesses’ testimony inconsistent and not corroborated.Co-accused acquitted on same evidence, raising question on selective conviction.The Court emphasized that injured witnesses are not infallible and their testimony must be scrutinized carefully.Due to these material contradictions and lack of credible evidence, the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.The convictions and sentences were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted.

Core Points 

Conviction under Sections 337-F(vi), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), and 34 PPC upheld by lower courts.

Incident involved armed attack causing injuries and death.